6970 réponses à ce sujet

[Seboist]

It's a shame (not)doing the "Geth Incursion" has no impact on anything.

Modifié par Seboist, 29 janvier 2012 - 01:25 .

[Kaiser Shepard]

Seboist wrote...

It's a shame (not)doing the "Geth Incursion" has no impact on anything.

Let's not get ahead of ourselves, at least not while even most of the big missions and decisions don't really impact anything.

[Seboist]

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

Seboist wrote...

It's a shame (not)doing the "Geth Incursion" has no impact on anything.

Let's not get ahead of ourselves, at least not while even most of the big missions and decisions don't really impact anything.

You kidding me? There's plenty of big impacts from our choices in the main missions! Didn't you see the big conflict with the Rachni trying to reclaim their worlds from the Krogan that the council gave them after the previous war?! That happens if you let the Queen go! Man that was some epic shit!!

I'm totally looking forward to the Quarian and Cerberus co-belligerence against the Geth in ME3 that happens if you go on the "Cerberus path" too.

Modifié par Seboist, 29 janvier 2012 - 03:14 .

[Kaiser Shepard]

Seboist wrote...

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

Seboist wrote...

It's a shame (not)doing the "Geth Incursion" has no impact on anything.

Let's not get ahead of ourselves, at least not while even most of the big missions and decisions don't really impact anything.

You kidding me? There's plenty of big impacts from our choices in the main missions! Didn't you see the big conflict with the Rachni trying to reclaim their worlds from the Krogan that the council gave them after the previous war?! That happens if you let the Queen go! Man that was some epic shit!!

I'm totally looking forward to the Quarian and Cerberus co-belligerence against the Geth in ME3 that happens if you go on the "Cerberus path" too.

Same here. Man, ME3 truly dwarfs not only Alpha Protocol, but Twitcher 2 as well.

If only all companies came through in the end like this.

[Seboist]

ME3 has some pretty deep themes line the one of the Cerberus path being "How far are you willing to go to save the galaxy?". There's no winner takes all in this game where you just pick a blue option or something. There's always a cost to (not) sacrificing something.

[Kaiser Shepard]

Seboist wrote...

ME3 has some pretty deep themes line the one of the Cerberus path being "How far are you willing to go to save the galaxy?". There's no winner takes all in this game where you just pick a blue option or something. There's always a cost to (not) sacrificing something.

It's pretty clear why the moral greyness and depth of the franchise is streets ahead of simple braindead shooters like Killzone, right?

Modifié par Kaiser Shepard, 29 janvier 2012 - 04:23 .

[Seboist]

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

Seboist wrote...

ME3 has some pretty deep themes line the one of the Cerberus path being "How far are you willing to go to save the galaxy?". There's no winner takes all in this game where you just pick a blue option or something. There's always a cost to (not) sacrificing something.

It's pretty clear why the moral greyness and depth of the franchise is streets ahead of simple braindead shooters like Killzone, right?

I know right. I especially love the socio-political depth with regards to the Vorcha who are a downtrodden race trying to improve their standard of living or the drama of colonial territorial disputes with the Batarians. These two races are definately not just there to provide Shepard with something to shoot at, no sir.

[BlueMagitek]

Alright guys, calm down. ~_~"

And yes, it was a shame that Geth Incursions really didn't have any direct effect on the story so far. However, I use it as the reason why the DA is able to be saved; the Geth are weakened while the Alliance is stronger (having not had to clear out the Geth themselves), and are able to eliminate both Geth and Sovereign.

I feel bad for the neutral option. It's the same outcome as the renegade one (but the neutral is clearly the best option at that time in the scenario). It's just a different expression for wanting the same thing to happen. And while I'm glad it's there for roleplay reasons, it's just kind of gimped. ._.

Anyway, let's try to get the focus back on TIM or Cerberus, we've been off track for a while now. In the past, I've said how I thought that Shepard would have to deal with Cerberus eventually, presumably in the post-Reaper galaxy. Did anybody else get this feeling, or were they hoping that Cerberus would be officially (or unofficially) reunited with the Alliance to do what the Alliance couldn't?

[Seboist]

BlueMagitek wrote...

Alright guys, calm down. ~_~"

And yes, it was a shame that Geth Incursions really didn't have any direct effect on the story so far. However, I use it as the reason why the DA is able to be saved; the Geth are weakened while the Alliance is stronger (having not had to clear out the Geth themselves), and are able to eliminate both Geth and Sovereign.

I feel bad for the neutral option. It's the same outcome as the renegade one (but the neutral is clearly the best option at that time in the scenario). It's just a different expression for wanting the same thing to happen. And while I'm glad it's there for roleplay reasons, it's just kind of gimped. ._.

Anyway, let's try to get the focus back on TIM or Cerberus, we've been off track for a while now. In the past, I've said how I thought that Shepard would have to deal with Cerberus eventually, presumably in the post-Reaper galaxy. Did anybody else get this feeling, or were they hoping that Cerberus would be officially (or unofficially) reunited with the Alliance to do what the Alliance couldn't?

I was anticipating or hoping that based on player choice in ME2 and with what happened in Retribution Shepard could decide to finish them off or recieve nominal support from them. The latter of which could have resulted in Shep deciding to let them continue operating as they were or to peacefuly disband it and give all it's personel immunity(like unit 731 after WW2).

Unfortunately ME3 turned out to have far more "depth" than I imagined.

[JosephDucreux]

I'm still disappointed Bioware nerfed TIM into Dr. Evil due to the forever-wailing hordes of Ta-I mean, kids who hate Cerberus just because Cerberus tried to retake their investment from their waifu's house, and said investment was stolen by pals of their waifu in the first place.

Modifié par JosephDucreux, 29 janvier 2012 - 06:24 .

[BlueMagitek]

Seboist wrote...

I was anticipating or hoping that based on player choice in ME2 and with what happened in Retribution Shepard could decide to finish them off or recieve nominal support from them. The latter of which could have resulted in Shep deciding to let them continue operating as they were or to peacefuly disband it and give all it's personel immunity(like unit 731 after WW2).

Unfortunately ME3 turned out to have far more "depth" than I imagined.

You know, Cerberus really shouldn't have had such a problem with funding; just send a few crew members after Shepard to strip the corpses of his enemies; sell that off.  If ME 1 taught me anything, weapon smuggling is a great way to make a buck.  

I imagined the DLCs to give some sort of advantage no matter what you did; keep David; you gain a boost of Overlord worshipping Geth to fight the Reapers, take David away, you get a smaller boost.  Similar to Zaeed and Kasumi's decisions (being Vido and the Graybox, respectively).  I have no idea how the encrypted Cerberus data is going to turn out.  

Anyway, I'm rambling.  I hadn't read Retribution, so to my knowledge, Cerberus was as it was at the end of ME 2; victorious over the Collectors; some losses had been suffered, but they had a base to study to find a weakness to the Reapers.

[Seboist]

BlueMagitek wrote...

Seboist wrote...

I was anticipating or hoping that based on player choice in ME2 and with what happened in Retribution Shepard could decide to finish them off or recieve nominal support from them. The latter of which could have resulted in Shep deciding to let them continue operating as they were or to peacefuly disband it and give all it's personel immunity(like unit 731 after WW2).

Unfortunately ME3 turned out to have far more "depth" than I imagined.

You know, Cerberus really shouldn't have had such a problem with funding; just send a few crew members after Shepard to strip the corpses of his enemies; sell that off.  If ME 1 taught me anything, weapon smuggling is a great way to make a buck.  

I imagined the DLCs to give some sort of advantage no matter what you did; keep David; you gain a boost of Overlord worshipping Geth to fight the Reapers, take David away, you get a smaller boost.  Similar to Zaeed and Kasumi's decisions (being Vido and the Graybox, respectively).  I have no idea how the encrypted Cerberus data is going to turn out.  

Anyway, I'm rambling.  I hadn't read Retribution, so to my knowledge, Cerberus was as it was at the end of ME 2; victorious over the Collectors; some losses had been suffered, but they had a base to study to find a weakness to the Reapers.

Cerberus had a number of it's front companies shutdown, Alliance supporters arrested and based shutdown with their personnel massacred. That coupled with the info on them from ME2 is why the brotherhood and others recognize how nonsensical their role in ME3 is.

And I vaguely hoped keeping David in Overlord would help in some Cerberus/Quarian co-belligerence against the Geth plot.

Modifié par Seboist, 29 janvier 2012 - 07:22 .

[Xilizhra]

Ah, yes. Complain about batarians not receiving any depth right after you complain about getting batarian aid in ME3...

[John Renegade]

Xilizhra wrote...

Ah, yes. Complain about batarians not receiving any depth right after you complain about getting batarian aid in ME3...

I'm not sure whether you're joking or just plainly trolling. You know from who we get that help and how out of character that is.

[Xilizhra]

Because one DLC is completely enough to tell you the nuances of someone's character, and Reaper invasion will change no one's priorities.

[John Renegade]

mrsph wrote...

Actually, no. I think that DLC tells you everything you need to know about that character.

Especially regarding his kind of irrational hate towards humans. (Which sort of hate is rational anyway?)

Modifié par John Renegade, 29 janvier 2012 - 02:05 .

[Xilizhra]

Actually, no. I think that DLC tells you everything you need to know about that character.

Evidently not.

Especially regarding his kind of irrational hate towards humans. (Which sort of hate is rational anyway?)

He does certainly seem to care about Shepard's opinion about his cause, for some reason.

[MisterJB]

John Renegade wrote...

mrsph wrote...

Actually, no. I think that DLC tells you everything you need to know about that character.

Especially regarding his kind of irrational hate towards humans. (Which sort of hate is rational anyway?)

His hate was never irrational. The main defining characteristic of that character was never hate for humans, hell, he even acknowledges that the people on that asteroid are, largely, innocent.

"How does killing innocent people make up for that?"
We had no other options!"

His main defining characteristic was love for his people. And you suggest that he would rather let the batarians go extinct than make common cause with the humans?

(Never tought I'd find myself agreeing with Xilizhra)

Modifié par MisterJB, 29 janvier 2012 - 02:30 .

[Xilizhra]

Irrational something, but it seems more like desperately lashing out than actually having one's top priority be to do harm per se.

[MisterJB]

Is destroying a relay? Maybe the Reapers really do want to talk.

Ok, not a fair comparision but he hated humans because of how, in his mind, they were to blame for the fall of the batarians. He rationalized it quite well, explained it in great detail to Shepard.

Irrational hatred is more what we see from Colonel Ashe who hates aliens because...they're ugly.

[Dean_the_Young]

Xilizhra wrote...

Irrational something, but it seems more like desperately lashing out than actually having one's top priority be to do harm per se.

That's not a relevant distinction, Xil.

If Balak wanted to protest, he could protest. If he wanted to subvert colonization efforts by fraud and subterfuge, he could start a conspriacy. There are many avenues of opposition available. If he wanted to wipe out any colony at all, he could have chosen a small one.

He wanted to wipe out a large colony.

Modifié par Dean_the_Young, 29 janvier 2012 - 02:56 .

[MisterJB]

I acknowledged that it was not the best comparison.
Howeved, in Balak's eyes, humans have proven over and over to be actively hostile against batarians.

Is Balak as monster? Yes, yes he is. Many have called The Illusive Man the same.
I'm sure Balak hates humans but the interactions with him show that he acts out of love for batarians. I would find it more OOC if he preferred have his people face the Reapers alone than make common cause with humans.

Modifié par MisterJB, 29 janvier 2012 - 03:07 .